If you want BS or Political Correctness you have come to the wrong place.

FAQ How can you be an atheist Jew?

An atheist is one who disbelieves in (or denies) the existence of God, Gods, and other supernatural beings.
A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

February 15, 2007

How To Deal With Iran, Iraq, The Palestinians, and Islam In General

This may sound insensitive, cold, and heartless, but why sugarcoat reality? Islam is the biggest threat to humanity facing our planet today. The only hope mankind has is time for Islamic reform, but time is a double edged sword because of Muslim breeding habits.

Islam today is collectively run by blood thirsty, intolerant, Western hating Muslim leaders. The so-called moderate Muslims may be the silent majority, but their silence is deafening. Whatever it is that holds the moderates back from taking over leadership of Islam worldwide, whether it is fear of the radicals, or complacency, or not committing "the sin" of dissing a fellow Muslim, isn't important right now. The moderate Muslims aren't even close to being in control, to the point that they are perceived as a tiny minority by many.

America gave Islam too much credit when it came to the Iraq war. They thought like far Left Liberals; that if you rid a country of a tyrant's regime, the country will appreciate it and start to build and grow. The common perception that everyone wants to be part of a Western culture with Western goals gets thrown out the door when you are dealing with Muslim countries.

The collective Muslim leadership today wants an ignorant world where there are only three groups: Muslims, Dhimmis, and the dead.

Islamic countries are breeding intelligence out of their gene pools, and perhaps they been doing this for 14 hundred years.

I noticed a phenomenon when Muslims were interviewed regularly during the Lebanon war: Muslim leaders don't answer simple yes/no questions, where they know the simple answer exposes them and their ideologies. This recent interview illustrates my observations well:

OK, so what does all this have to do with dealing with Iran, Iraq, The Palestinians, and Islam in general?

Well, I've taken all the above into consideration, and I've concluded that the only way to deal with Islam it to use evolution to our advantage. This means wiping out the radical elements whenever we can, and periodically bombing Islam into the 21st Century.

Iraq: I support Western troops whole heartedly, but the reality of the situation is that it is a lost cause to put anymore Western lives at danger. The Muslims have proved that they will keep attacking and attacking. The best way to deal with this problem, is to leave, let the Iraqis deal with things by themselves. If a group emerges that poses a threat to the future of our homo sapien species, then tactical bombs should be launched. If it pisses off the Muslims...........too bad. If it isn't tactical bombs that pisses them off, it is cartoons.Also, I want to make it clear that the soldiers who have died in Iraq have not died for no reason. Their deaths have paved the way to give humanity a chance to keep going. Fighting this war against Islam, trial and error had to be employed. The Muslims have proved they are not ready to enter the 21st Century yet. America tried the quick route, it has all but failed, but now they know what needs to be done.

Iran: Tactical bombs. Negotiations. More tactical bombs. Repeat until they wave a white flag. Forget about Israel for a minute, even Saudi Arabia doesn't want this mental case regime to have nukes. The Islam mentality isn't the Communist Cold War mentality. Islamists don't mind dying for Allah. They can't have nukes, no way, no how.

Palestinians: I'll repeat this; If the Arabs dropped their arms, there would be peace. Israel needs to define continuous final borders that surround most of their existing settlements in the West Bank.The Arabs are gonna whine and attack regardless of where they are. The "Green-Line" was a non issue to them, and they voted in a leadership that isn't after a state that lies next to a Jewish state, but one that has a goal of eliminating the Jewish state. Draw the final borders, build a giant wall. The attacks won't stop, but Israel will have carte blanche to use tactical bombs until whenever the bombing stop. The Palestinians can call the land on their side of the wall whatever the hell they want to call it, but they will be responsible for whatever bombs are launched from their side of the fence too.

Islam in general: The average non Muslim couple in Europe now have less than 2 children each. Muslims have over 4 or 5 kids per couple. Over population is a concern for our species as is. I see nothing wrong with putting a heavy tax on anyone who has more than two children in the West. Also, I am all for racial profiling. My rights mean squat when we are dead. Muslims are exactly why the West must maintain a huge separation of church and state. No praying in school gyms for example, and quit fighting reality when it comes to evolution in the classroom. Muslims don't believe in evolution for the most part. Teach them evolution and make every child take science classes(facts need to be taught, this is not an ideological issue), and then Muslims will see their bible is not to be taken literally. Believers who don't take their bible literally have a far greater chance to become tolerant of mankind as a whole.

I'm tolerant of those who don't want to force their ideology on me and/or want to change my way of life. I'm not tolerant today of what Islam is all about today.

24 comments:

I think you overestimate the threat Islam poses to the West. Sure, their leaders want us dead and want to take over the world, but they have no chance of realizing even the smallest part of that dream. Without their oil, virtually all Arab countries would be nothing on the world stage. Terrorism sucks, and thousands of people have died from it, but it's not exactly up there with the threat that was posed by the Soviets or even the potential threat today posed by China.

Even if Iran gets a couple nuclear weapons, the worst case scenario is that they murder a few hundred thousand people. We must do everything we can to prevent such an atrocity from happening, but we shouldn't act like they're a threat to other countries' existence.

We can almost certainly prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons without going to war with them. If they do get nuclear weapons, we can almost certain prevent them from using them.

Radical Islam will not be defeated by bombs and bullets. It will be defeated by secularism and money. Hollywood and McDonald's are stronger weapons in the war on radical Islam than stealth bombers and nuclear weapons.

I agree w/the (other) jewish atheist: the better response is assimilation (us over them, IOWs). & how on earth to you bomb someone forward into the 21st CE? & moderate Muslims have spoken up. Problem is, it's about the same as this analogy:It's easier to harass rich white women about wearing fur than it is to harangue Hell's Angels for wearing leather.White women won't bust your jaw or your head. Iran, as I understand it, is for the most part pro-American. Not the leaders, but the youth.

RE: "Radical Islam will not be defeated by bombs and bullets. It will be defeated by secularism and money. Hollywood and McDonald's are stronger weapons in the war on radical Islam than stealth bombers and nuclear weapons."

I agree with this. Unfortunately, I think it is the secularism, Hollywood and Macdonalds that the radicals are kicking up the biggest stink about.

My impression is that for the orthodox muslim, the traditional muslim, it is all the things to do with "American secular life" that they DON'T want in their countries as they see these things as inconsistent and damaging to their religious beliefs.

Pretty well in the same way that orthodox or traditional christians see "American secular life" as inconsistent and damaging to THEIR christian religious beliefs.

JA, I'm not saying Radical Islam will get defeated. It won't. It just has to be dealt with until it eventually goes extinct. And I agree secularism is the answer, but it will take years.

The Soviet and Chinese threats were mild because they didn't want to commit suicide.

KA, the Iraq war did one real good thing, it moved many other Muslim countries a step into the 21st Century. Many countries surveyed now have moved Western like priorities up on their goal lists.I am not talking about nuking Iran, but strategically bombing it to prevent them from building nukes.

Beep, the only thing I disagree with is why are they coming to the West?

The Pat, if you think it is racist for me to say that blacks are over represented in US jails, then I am a racist.

The best way to deal with this problem, is to leave, let the Iraqis deal with things by themselves. If a group emerges that poses a threat to the future of our homo sapien species, then tactical bombs should be launched.

I don't really have a problem with that...as a last resort. Unlike our current US fearless leader who would like to have done that a year ago.

We haven't even begun to explore other options much less tried any, we've simply called them evil and worked on building a case to destroy them. Not a good way to begin negotiations.

I wholeheartedly agree about maintaining separation of church and state but our government can't very well advocate that for anyone as we aren't able to do it ourselves lately. We've become too much like a Christian version of the Islamists.

racial profiling is the reason they are over represented. The cops go out looking for black criminals they will find them, guilty or not.

any kind of racial profiling is idiotic, because it creates the prejudice that that group is more likely to commit crime. When cops are told black people are more likely to commit crimes of course its going to result in more black people being arrested.

simply because there a more blacks in American jails does not necessarily mean blacks commit more crimes.although upon re reading your post i apologize for using the word racist perhaps the prejudiced, or ignorant would be more appropriate.

you look at the Muslim "leaders" on the news and say they are like all Muslims. You point out a statistic that "Muslims have over 4 or 5 kids per couple" thats a ridiculous comment. They don't have 4-5 kids because they're Muslim, they just happen to live in the developing world, everyone has 4-5 kids there.

and i find it interesting how in your last post your all against prejudice when it concerns atheists, but its fine the to pre judge Muslims and call them all terrorists.

BEAJ:KA, the Iraq war did one real good thing, it moved many other Muslim countries a step into the 21st Century. Many countries surveyed now have moved Western like priorities up on their goal lists.The problem being, is that a great many moderates are now, as a result, not quite so 'moderate' anymore.I am not talking about nuking Iran, but strategically bombing it to prevent them from building nukes.I understand that, but preemptive strikes are prone to human error. It's a major dilemma, as innocents will inevitably be caught in the crossfire.

KA, there is no perfect solution. It is my contention that if Iran builds nukes, more innocent people will die than if they don't build them.As far as being less moderate, if the overall move is towards Western values then that is just a price paid to save humanity.

The pat, it is you who is ignorant. Muslims in Europe have a 3 times higher birthrate than non Muslims.

And that is just plain foolish to blame black crime on racial profiling. Racial profiling may be responsible for a slight difference in who gets arrested, but the idea is that you focus limited resources where they are most likely to be needed.

Do Muslims commit suicide bombings because of racial profiling?

I didn't call Muslims terrorists. Most Muslims aren't terrorists, however, almost all terrorists are Muslim.

I will say this: your attitude is borderline racism because you tend to generalise hopelessly about an entire group, which in reality is as diverse as any other social group. That's one of the definitions of xenophobia of one kind or another, including modern anti-Semitism.

Your attitude is very common in North America, perhaps understandably and not surprisingly, as the US has been at the receiving end of Islamist terror by far the most. This is giving rise to virulent Islamophobia (and I'm specifically NOT referring to "Islamist-ophobia"), which if directed at any other group would result in the most vehement criticism. But not so when it comes to Muslims...

In the US a complete mythology is being created regarding Muslims, Iran and "Eurabia" and it's difficult to find the dissenting voices which are being constantly drowned out by whipped up mass-hysteria. Regards "Eurabia", come and see our beautiful "dhimmified" continent and see for yourself. Over here we're cracking up with laughter at this pathetic idea. But I've yet to meet the first American who'll even acknowledge my points...

My advice? Fight the Islamists tooth and nail but not Islam...

Also, try and keep evolution out of all of this: unless you're being jocular, you're at risk of joining the quack-science squad...

Gert, I'm saying expecting radical Islam to disappear anytime soon is hopeless, but longterm as more Muslims discover science, the more they will be inclined to have a secular mindset...which is hopeful, but will take time, and is a must if humans are not to go extinct.

A reason Blacks are over-represented in jails, is because they are over-represented in crime. Additionally, they do not have the resources needed to get representation and often are given less caring and capable lawyers.

I tend to think that you generalize a bit too much in this post as well. It is tough to lay out a policy for dealing with a group of over 1 billion in a few hundred words.

I don't think that Islam poses any real threat to Western ideals, Western liberalism, or the human race as a whole. While there will no doubt be the extremist groups and individuals who will continue to make things difficult for the West, the isolationist tactics, mostly present in the Middle East, Iran, Pakistan, Jordan, etc. but also elsewhere, will break down eventually.

Especially in the world we live in today, they can only block out reality for so long.

On another note, I think the_pat fails to realize any of the benefits of profiling. Around the U.S. and I'm sure other nations, thousands of people are employed to do just that, and profiling tactics help to find criminals everyday. He seems to think that blacks are the only people who are profiled, thats simply not true. There are statistically very few black serial killers, for instance, so when you look for a suspect, it makes sense to look more towards caucasians.

IQ has already been largely dismissed as totally rubbish and culturally biased. It's about as useful, scientifically speaking, as Lombroso's phrenology.

We tend to measure 'intelligence' by means of a person's 'success' but many 'successful' people aren't particularly intelligent, academic or have a high 'IQ'. Cultural and sociological factors have far, far, far more influence on a person's development than the 'IQ' of his/her parents.

The correlations you're referring to are deeply flawed and 'all things being equal' is something that cannot be applied to human populations.

As regards British believers in 'dhimmification', most that I know are deeply racist (also towards other 'foreigners') and already were that, long before 9/11. Now they've got some more arrows on their crooked bow. Many of those idiots are also deeply conservative and suspicious of modern science and Evolutionary Biology. Many I tend to give a wide berth when I meet them in a pub because they'd sooner give you a bloody nose than look at you (forget discussing anything).

Regarding Islam, yours is a visceral knee-jerk reaction, not at all rational. You're a victim of propaganda and so are many Islamists.

Gert, are you saying that all people are created with equal intelligence capabilities, outside of those born with Down Syndrome, etc? I don't buy it. IQ may be culturally biased, but it isn't total rubbish.

I'll have to take your word for it about the Brits. But I would expect if you are right, someone like Pub Publisher would have to dislike Jews too. Correct?

Gert, IQ tests don't measure success, they measure capabilities. What you say others perceive to be the standard of success (intelligence) is not what IQ tests are designed to discover.They are flawed but not to the extent that you want people to believe.

The whole question about blacks in jail is also irrelevant to the original intent of beaj's post.

The arabs have created a "culture" of hate and ignorance, whether it is through the genetic failures of inbreeding, sitting in the sun too long or having a Holy text that is massively misconstrued by a large number of their population.

Whether we educate them into the 21st century or bomb them back to more than just a cultural Stone Age is where the debate lies. I'll go for education but I'm not sure it's possible.

One of the problems with 'intelligence' is that it is almost impossible to define. As a result, people do almost inevitable confound between 'intelligence', 'academic achievements', 'numeric and/or literacy skills', or simply 'worldly success'. The existence of 'intelligence' and 'IQ' assumes there exit innate human capabilities, passed on to us at conception and that is of course true. But the impact of social conditions, parental efforts, good schooling, safety and security and many other factors usually outweighs these innate capabilities. Simplistically put, it's what you do with it, rather than what you've got.

The idea that Islam's problems may somehow relate to 'genetic inbreeding' is ludicrous to the nth degree and can be dismissed easily. Small countries like Belgium and Holland, because of their relatively small gene pool would logically speaking have bred themselves out of existence, if inbreeding was a human problem. It isn't because even quite small gene pools don't lead to inbreeding, except for the most extreme cases.

As regards whether people like pubphilosopher are anti-Semites? Probably not. Their racism is specifically oriented against immigrants and British Jews aren't viewed in that way. European Islamophobia started rearing its ugly head when in the eighties the labour market started changing and we found ourselves with a surplus of guest workers, mostly from the Magreb and hence mostly Muslims. And so the myth of the 'Bad Muslim' was brought to life. Pubphilosopher et al simply embroider some more, now they've got Islamic terror as a new topic. In essence many of these racists are of the 'one country, one people' variety. Where have I heard that before (starts with N and ends with I)?

I believe genuine critiquing of Islam (and of course Radical Islam) is perfectly Ok but on these sites I don't see a great deal of that. Instead much jingoistic nonsense is spouted, most of which is then extrapolated in a stereotypical manner to all of Islam. The cluster of flunkies that populate Mad Zionist's blog are perfect examples.

Why does any comment against Islam always get immediately labelled as racism? It's an ideology - not a race. If BEAJ was motivated by racism then why would he previously have had so much praise for people like Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and even practicing Muslims who speak out against terrorism and theocracy?

The inbreeding idea is of course nonsense and I'd far rather listen to geneticists and biologists who overwhelmingly state that race has little or no taxonomic value. But the same rules of selection are equally likely to be active in the meme pool as the gene pool. The simple fact that there is overwhelmingly wide spread support for the death penalty for apostacy within Islamic society (the denial of someones right to think and choose freely) should be a danger signal and any amount of apologetics is beside the point.

Islam is a danger to values the West has adopted and so a strategy is required to protect that which we deem to be important just as Wahabi Muslims are strategising and acting to protect and promote that which they deem to be important. There is a conflict of interests and ultimately one side will have to win since the objectives of both sides require the ideological defeat of the other. Whilst the vast majority do occupy some grey territory of the middle ground the conflict itself acts to polarise and it is by no means unreasonable to require people to choose sides. Moderate Muslims must embrace moderate values and defend them, as some are doing, and moderate Westerners must realise that ultimately faced with a immoderate enemy that they will either have to be immoderate against it or defeated by it. But none of this has anythng at all to do with race.

BTW, the idea that the UK population laugh at the Eurabia idea is a massive generalisation. I personally know many non-racist UK citizens who are honestly concerned at the apologetics being applied to Islam in the UK because they are starting to realise what a slippery slope they are on by allowing special exception to those values for a single community. I have also read many comments and posts from racist UK citizens who speak of the benefits of allying with Islam for common goals. The generalisation is absurd and has nothing at all to do with conflict over core values, such as individual rights, gay rights, womens rights and violence or even support for violence as a valid application of faith.

Practically, speaking people do need to recognise that there is a conflict and that it must be dealt with in defence of liberal values unless we wish to be so liberal that we are prepared to lose our values for the oppressive values of others. If mainstream Islam wasn't related world wide to intolerance of and violence against non-Muslims (or even different Muslim factions) then those talking about racism and intolerance may have a point. Sadly, they don't.